I buy mine at the feed store and have seen it labeled 99.9% and 99.7%. It doesn't tell what that little variation means.
Having work in veterinary medicine we were told that the medicines for animal use are exactly the same as human pharmaceutics. It just gets a different label and lower price! Some of you may remember when Ala. Governor George Wallace went through his misery. Early on he wanted to use DMSO, but was denied it in the USA. He went to Mexico for treatment. It is said that it helped, but the man had so many problems that the quality of his life was bad news. I think perhaps his situation was instrumental in labeling it for urology. They use it a bunch and with good results. Isn't that amazing. I know a doctor that considered using DMSO and CS for bladder irrigation as a treatment for interstitial cystitis, but on considering his malpractice insurance escalating, decided to stick with government regulations. So much for healing. ----- Original Message ----- From: Jeannie <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 05, 2002 6:54 AM Subject: Re: CS>Re: CS-DMSO > > > Malcolm Stebbins wrote: > > > Hi Jeannie; I get my DMSO at the feed store - only place available, says it's 99.7% > > pure on the bottle, ok for vet use. I don't use much so haven't been back for 2 > > months, it's for my old cat and I've been mixing it with CS for topical > > application. > > It seems strange that some company is making vet quality DMSO (same quality & purity > > requirements I think as if it were for humans), but the FDA still insists it is > > unapproved for human use (at least as medication), > > Dr. Jacobs, who pioneered the medicinal uses of DMSO, made the FDA mad by not following > protocol, and embarrassing them, and they have never gotten over it. So it got approved > for vet use, but not for people. :) > > > how could it be better from the > > health food store? Can you give me a reference? > > I don't know. As far as I have known, DMSO is DMSO. 99% should be the same wherever > you get it. But then, I don't know the process they use to make it, or whatever. > > The reference won't do you any good. It was from some printed material on arthritis my > husband had that his nurse-sister sent him email. I can't see on the material where she > got it. > > I just happened to read it right after sending the recommendation to the list that they > could get it at the hardware. So I thought I had better pass on the information that at > least whoever wrote the material thought it had some kind of problem if bought from the > hardware. I have been using it from there for years, but they could know something I > don't. > > > > > I wonder who is going to foot the half million dollar bill for the studies after all > > these years . . . unless perhaps it's Hoffmann LaRoche or Glaxo? Are they hoping > > for some captive customer base when the FDA mounts 'anti-terrorist' guards at the > > local hay and grain? (Oh, Sh--!! I Hope that's just a joke.) > > Malcolm > > I hope so too, but I wouldn't bet on it. LOL > > Jeannie > > > -- > Women like silent men -- they think they're listening > > > > Jeannie McReynolds > Oregon Coast > > > > > -- > The silver-list is a moderated forum for discussion of colloidal silver. > > Instructions for unsubscribing may be found at: http://silverlist.org > > To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > Silver-list archive: http://escribe.com/health/thesilverlist/index.html > > List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> > >
